What is an old calenderisist ? What is there belief ?. Do they have different vestments the priests?.

they schismed with the "canonical" orthodox churches after they changed from the julian calendar to the new calendar (basically the gregorian calendar)

no they do not wear different vestments

they are much more traditional and anti-ecumenist. they are quite fractured as well, which greatly reduces their authority on things. at least I hear there are many different opposing old calenderist churches...

personally I do not think the calendar is worth schism over. it is not a matter of faith. it was a scandal how the new calendar was implemented though

"Tradition." To those of us who profess the Orthodox faith, tradition is a concept over which we tear ourselves apart to our very core. We all "get" the concept, but the transfer of the concept into real practice is illusive at best.

It is easy to see how to practice tradition, just don't change anything which has been in the churches teaching/liturgy/anything for the past thousand years!

Quote

A new priest comes to a parish and "changes" things - perhaps to reflect what was "familiar" to him as a child or something he read about or idealized.

The old Bishop was strict about divorces, another one - not so much.

Changes things, please explain more what the changes would be in this imagined priest. As to the imagined bishop who does economia for everything with divorces, why should that become okay or even the norm?

Quote

The liturgy itself is not something static - it was not "revealed" to St. John or St. Basil like some golden tablets under a rock or narrated by an "angel."

I disagree, I feel the liturgy was written with the holy spirit guiding those saints hands and minds. But I really do not like what you just said, because all it reminds me of is the justifications for the butchering of the mass again and again and again in the latin church.

Quote

Plenty of canons have little if any relevance to life today. Are you avoiding that Jewish surgeon perchance?

Look, you can ignore all the canons you want if you wish but I would rather NOT be anathemized by the holy fathers in heaven and the holy spirit that worked through them in the ecumenical councils just to appease modern man. How can anyone not care about the anathemas which is hurled against things even said in this thread?! You imply the holy fathers were wrong, so just say it! If they were wrong in those canons, they can certainly be wrong in all the canons!

Quote

There was a time in the history of the Church wherein the concept of a world and a church operating without a "basileus" or "tsar" was not just inconceivable, but likely viewed as heretical.

source please! I cannot recall any canons saying if the emperor ceased to exist the church would cease to exist. Never have I heard from any holy father that the church requires an emperor (how did the church exist before the christian emperors then?)

Quote

These are just a few random thoughts but I am sure we could use all of the forum's bandwidth if we really tried!

let it be done, so this forum can finally break! It would save a few souls! including mine!

Quote

There is no perfect age, no ideal time - we are stuck for now with this "now."

at least you did not say the time is the "future"...

Quote

So we pray, we worship, we learn and in the end, the Church endures. Throughout that process we endeavor to find the way to our salvation.

"Tradition." To those of us who profess the Orthodox faith, tradition is a concept over which we tear ourselves apart to our very core. We all "get" the concept, but the transfer of the concept into real practice is illusive at best.

It is easy to see how to practice tradition, just don't change anything which has been in the churches teaching/liturgy/anything for the past thousand years!

Quote

A new priest comes to a parish and "changes" things - perhaps to reflect what was "familiar" to him as a child or something he read about or idealized.

The old Bishop was strict about divorces, another one - not so much.

Changes things, please explain more what the changes would be in this imagined priest. As to the imagined bishop who does economia for everything with divorces, why should that become okay or even the norm?

Quote

The liturgy itself is not something static - it was not "revealed" to St. John or St. Basil like some golden tablets under a rock or narrated by an "angel."

I disagree, I feel the liturgy was written with the holy spirit guiding those saints hands and minds. But I really do not like what you just said, because all it reminds me of is the justifications for the butchering of the mass again and again and again in the latin church.

Quote

Plenty of canons have little if any relevance to life today. Are you avoiding that Jewish surgeon perchance?

Look, you can ignore all the canons you want if you wish but I would rather NOT be anathemized by the holy fathers in heaven and the holy spirit that worked through them in the ecumenical councils just to appease modern man. How can anyone not care about the anathemas which is hurled against things even said in this thread?! You imply the holy fathers were wrong, so just say it! If they were wrong in those canons, they can certainly be wrong in all the canons!

Quote

There was a time in the history of the Church wherein the concept of a world and a church operating without a "basileus" or "tsar" was not just inconceivable, but likely viewed as heretical.

source please! I cannot recall any canons saying if the emperor ceased to exist the church would cease to exist. Never have I heard from any holy father that the church requires an emperor (how did the church exist before the christian emperors then?)

Quote

These are just a few random thoughts but I am sure we could use all of the forum's bandwidth if we really tried!

let it be done, so this forum can finally break! It would save a few souls! including mine!

Quote

There is no perfect age, no ideal time - we are stuck for now with this "now."

at least you did not say the time is the "future"...

Quote

So we pray, we worship, we learn and in the end, the Church endures. Throughout that process we endeavor to find the way to our salvation.

as we cause schisms over and over for little benefit

[/quote]

You need to find one of the super judgmental, super external, super 'Orthodox' jurisdictions where you and the elders can sit around 'tut tutting' the state of the rest of us.

I will give you one example of Bishops and their rules. The late Metropolitan Nicholas refused to grant ecclesiastical divorces to two couples married in one of his churches. The woman wanted to marry a man from her home parish who was also married in the same church. The woman refused to accept this and moved into the jurisdiction of then Bishop Tikhon of the OCA who, without consulting the pastor of the parish from which they came in the ACROD, granted the divorces and the parties were married in the OCA church. This caused a scandal within the original parish when they returned from out of state since the other woman could not remarry in the church as her divorce had likewise been rejected. Since they had received a canonical divorce and been married in the Church, the pastor had little choice but to receive them back. This is real world stuff my friend, not the abstractions and distractions people here fixate upon. Frankly, there were canonical justifications for the actions of either Bishop and since there is no administrative unity in America, stuff like this happens.

As to traditions - there are, for example valid Greek and valid Russian ones. There are different rubrics as well. The differences are subtle, but real and they are equally valid.

As to one thousand years? I believe that the Nikonian reforms came within that period, as did the changes to the Greek Euchologian in the 19th century.

I could go on, but facts are boring and never convincing in the face of strongly held opinion.

You didn't answer the question about the Jewish doctor.

I didn't say that the lack of emperor was doctrinal only that it was perceived to be an impossibility....but there are plenty of folks like the schismatic, Vladimir Moss, who would argue with you on that point.

After much discussion with the mod team, we decided that such inflammatory titles against certain figures of either Eastern Orthodox, Certain Old Calendarist/Traditionalist Orthodox, or Oriental Orthodox, each canonically defined in their own ways, even though divided from one another, cannot be called "heretics," "schismatics", or any equivalent of the phrases. Vladimir Moss, from what is understood, fits under this description, and so it would be inappropriate and against forum rules to call him a "schismatic", as the title carries a more condemnatory tone. It is more fitting to say, "he is in schism from..." or "he is a member of a church that is in schism in relation to..." etc. I will not administer a warning, since this post has been a while ago, and the rules might not have been clear to many. So this will be a friendly reminder so that it hopefully this won't happen again or as much.

But as to how they are more traditional, it is easy to tell. How many greek churches have pews? how many do not divide the laity to male and female on each side? As far as I can tell, old calanderists seem to take all traditions much more seriously.

Quote

From what I've been reading they seem to be extremely ecumenical in terms of relations of other similar groups they go in or out of communion on monthly basis etc.

Yes I find the old calanderists to be quite weird. but they obviously are not for ecumenism with heretics and heathens, which the hierarchy of the Greek church is for universally now minus a few bishops in Greece.

You need to find one of the super judgmental, super external, super 'Orthodox' jurisdictions where you and the elders can sit around 'tut tutting' the state of the rest of us.

No thanks, I still have hope that the greek church will see that ecumenism does not work just like they did in the council of Florence. Or until the "VERY SOON" Great and Holy Council (though obviously not more holy than His All-Holiness)

Quote

I will give you one example of Bishops and their rules. The late Metropolitan Nicholas refused to grant ecclesiastical divorces to two couples married in one of his churches. The woman wanted to marry a man from her home parish who was also married in the same church. The woman refused to accept this and moved into the jurisdiction of then Bishop Tikhon of the OCA who, without consulting the pastor of the parish from which they came in the ACROD, granted the divorces and the parties were married in the OCA church. This caused a scandal within the original parish when they returned from out of state since the other woman could not remarry in the church as her divorce had likewise been rejected. Since they had received a canonical divorce and been married in the Church, the pastor had little choice but to receive them back. This is real world stuff my friend, not the abstractions and distractions people here fixate upon. Frankly, there were canonical justifications for the actions of either Bishop and since there is no administrative unity in America, stuff like this happens.

That is very interesting, but that is just a product of there being multiple bishops for a single city which is against canons anyway. I thought you were talking about a bishop who just gives out divorces to fit modern expectations to do so.

Quote

As to traditions - there are, for example valid Greek and valid Russian ones. There are different rubrics as well. The differences are subtle, but real and they are equally valid.As to one thousand years? I believe that the Nikonian reforms came within that period, as did the changes to the Greek Euchologian in the 19th century.

A thousand years is just a random number I put out. I simply mean, to be traditional just do not innovate, especially just to accommodate a more secularized people such as today. Is the church supposed to change its mind on things, or the people, brought up with different ideas, supposed to!? I don't see any problem with there being different russian and greek traditions, or even different liturgy rites. Again, it is easy to tell what is innovation and what is traditional in the church today.

Quote

I could go on, but facts are boring and never convincing in the face of strongly held opinion.

I wish you did go on

Quote

You didn't answer the question about the Jewish doctor.

It is not obvious from what I said?? Yes, I will keep that canon. Even though it meant a kind of doctor which would not be called a "doctor" today.

Quote

I didn't say that the lack of emperor was doctrinal only that it was perceived to be an impossibility....but there are plenty of folks like the schismatic, Vladimir Moss, who would argue with you on that point.

I have never read Vladimir Moss and I hope I never do, I really only read church fathers I know they will not be wrong, compared to those today one cannot trust fully because they have not been accepted by councils as having correct teachings.

But I am still confused about this, who ever perceived the emperor as being necessary to the church? I am just talking about the fathers. Were you just talking about those today or the fathers??? But anyway, sounds like an interesting thing to debate for fun, from a secular point of view. How many times did the emperor put heretical patriarchs on the throne, and yet in other instances, putting "Orthodox" patriarchs to replace those patriarchs in other times!

Tragically the canons are too often viewed as cudgels for those who don't follow the part line follow the example of those who themselves have an amazing capacity to ignore those same canons in their own ministry.

No, much more 'canonical' Michal for them to run after those who indulge in inter-Faith activity, joint worship with the heterodox, agreements between 'Canonical' Orthodox and non-Chalcedonians, Patriarchs attending Chanukkah celebrations are serious breaches of the Canons, and would in a healthier Orthodox world would not be tolerated by people, the Holy Mountain or anyone whose faith was of one mind with that of the Ecumenical Councils and the witness of those like Saint Mark of Ephesus, who stood almost alone against the predecessors of today's 'canonical' Orthodox.

In referring to inter-Faith I have in mind I have in mind the totally unacceptable multi-faith gathering at Assisi and another in Kazakhstan attended by representatives of the Moscow Patriarchia.

Healthy bodies have anti-bodies, as did the Greek and Russian Churches of St Mark's time. What he and the Church Fathers would have made of that abomination, the so-called World Council of Churches and the smaller National Councils of Churches, does not need a Divinity degree or a diagram. And a less informed understanding of canonicity might be corrected by reading a lengthy essay on the subject by the late Father John Meyendorff. (Available on the Orthodox Christian Information Centre website).

It is easy to scoff at the witness of some, but the irony is that all too often those who parade their 'canonical' status which on examination turns out to mean yoking the righteous with unrighteousness. By their fruit you shall know them, and Orthodox involvement in the WCC has not produced any of the fruit spoken of by the Orthodox apologists for the membership of local churches in this misnamed organisation.

If being in communion with the EP is essential in order to be Orthodox then Saint Mark had separated himself from the Church(!) But, of course, today we all better informed and more deeply knowledgeable than the Church Fathers, who after all had all sorts of hang ups, misunderstandings and inadequacies. Sadly no, this is not the case - we are not worthy to undo the bootstraps of those courageous witnesses that went before us.

Pardon my lack of awareness, but in the case of churches which have the men and women on different sides, where do the little kids go? Just wondering.

To and fro

The little boys go to and fro, but the little girls are usually asked to stay with their mother, but at the end of the Divine Liturgy, there is a rush where all the little girls charge their fathers. It is a site to behold with most fathers holding one or two of their daughters.